FANDOM


This is the talk page for discussing the page, Number ruins.

Please try to

  • Be polite
  • Assume good faith
  • Be welcoming

Split?

Anyone else think it would be worth splitting out each ruin into its own article? Cheesedude (talkcontribs) 02:18, June 7, 2013 (UTC)

I think it's okay having them all organized under 1 article. Splitting them up would make really small articles for each. I don't see much problem in having to link to a particular section (for different ruins) in other articles. --UltimateKuriboh (talkcontribs) 02:31, June 7, 2013 (UTC)
Like Ultimate say, let's treat them as minor Deck Recipe in some certain Characters, like Rally Dawson or Mr. Armstrong. They gotta gain up until they're too "fat" or "overweight" to stay within the article. --iFredCat 02:37, June 7, 2013 (UTC)
I've contemplated suggesting this before. I agree with Cheesedude. I don't think length is as big a factor as it's made out to be and think independent objects are generally deserving of their own articles, same way a card or episode would typically gets its own article even if for some reason there was very little content to include on their page. Two to three paragraphs, plus an intro and images isn't too short anyway. It also gives us the ability to add more specific categories, properties and infoboxes, if necessary.
I'm a bit iffy about section linking between articles, as it sends to reader to somewhere with no intro paragraph and the content can require the rest of the page for context. e.g. if someone clicks a link to the mountain palace, they'd expect to be told what it is, but are told how it compares to the other ruins and what its "Number" and "Number" guardian are. That's fine for something that's part of the Number ruins page, but not for an independent description. -- Deltaneos (talk) 03:21, June 7, 2013 (UTC)
Heys guys, about splitting into small articles; i agree with everyone here, its fine with in one article, plus there are only six ruins and all don't have much on it, just brief summaries and infos Rubi1998 (talkcontribs) 13:31, June 17, 2013 (UTC)

Number 64

As no ruins were shown for Number 64, shouldn't we at least say that there were no ruins shown instead of not making any mention of it at all? A Shining Star appeared!! (Make a Wish) 19:45, June 22, 2013 (UTC)

Yes that probably is worthwhile doing so for those who have seen it in full if they would like to (I would but I haven't seen it so I don't want to unnecessarily stuff it up if there is anything else that should go in) Sardeth42 (talkcontribs) 06:02, June 25, 2013 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.